Contradiction with Exodus 14:14
Deuteronomy 3:20 instructs the Israelites to fight for their land, while Exodus 14:14 emphasizes that they won’t need to fight because the Lord will fight for them.
Exodus 14:14: The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:9
Deuteronomy 3:20 talks about warfare to secure land, whereas Matthew 5:9 promotes peace and peacekeeping as blessed.
Matthew 5:9: Blessed [are] the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Contradiction with Isaiah 2:4
Deuteronomy 3:20 involves taking land through conflict, but Isaiah 2:4 envisions a future where nations do not learn war anymore.
Isaiah 2:4: And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. [pruninghooks: or, scythes]
Contradiction with Romans 12:19
Deuteronomy 3:20 suggests taking action to claim land, while Romans 12:19 advises against seeking personal vengeance, leaving it to God.
Romans 12:19: Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Contradiction with Hebrews 4:8-9
Deuteronomy 3:20 speaks of achieving rest through war, whereas Hebrews 4:8-9 speaks of a different type of rest that doesn’t involve fighting.
Hebrews 4:8-9: For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. [Jesus: that is, Joshua]
Paradox #1
Deuteronomy 3:20 might be seen as having a moral conflict because it talks about how some people have to wait before they can enjoy their promised land until others have already received theirs. This might seem unfair or unequal, as it creates different timetables and conditions for people's happiness and fulfillment based on collective obligations rather than individual circumstances.